One of the most common computer user input devices in use today is the computer mouse. There is continuing research in the areas of ergonomics, in order to determine the best overall physical conformation (the best overall shape of the exterior surfaces) of a computer mouse. In addition, regardless of ergonomics, user preferences change. Manufacturers of computer mice often desire to build and sell mice that users want. Therefore, the overall physical conformation of a computer mouse which a manufacturer desires to produce can change with user preferences.
Currently, when a mouse with a new physical conformation is developed, this usually requires a complete redesign of the layout of the physical components of the mouse (such as buttons, scroll wheels, optics, etc.) as well as the circuitry within the mouse. For instance, the physical layout of optical navigation elements must be redesigned each time the overall outer conformation of the mouse is redesigned. The optical navigation elements often include a light source, a camera, and optics (such as lenses, light pipes, etc.). Such a redesign of the physical layout of the optical navigation elements requires the new physical layout to be re-tested, tolerances to be determined, and optimization to be performed, each time the redesign is done. These new designs thus require external testing, specification development and quality control methods.
Some current mouse design approaches have attempted to develop a platform around which new mouse designs can be based, without changing certain portions of the original mouse design. However, these prior platform approaches have primarily involved consolidating printed circuit board components, within the mouse, such that a new mouse may not need a completely new printed circuit board assembly. However, these types of approaches have been quite restrictive.
For instance, the end result of using a printed circuit board assembly as a platform is a requirement that the printed circuit board must be mounted, within the mouse, in a given fashion. This has resulted in a common mouse bottom case (the base surface of the mouse that engages the work surface over which the mouse travels) which, itself, requires a fixed bottom case footprint that restricts industrial design. If the bottom case footprint is fixed, there is relatively little design freedom. Alternatively, if only the printed circuit board assembly is fixed, then there can be relatively few manufacturing volume efficiencies derived that result in cost advantages. For these reasons, there have been very few printed circuit board assembly platforms that have been implemented for mouse designs in the industry. They are fairly restrictive, and they simply do not yield significant cost advantages.
The discussion above is merely provided for general background information and is not intended to be used as an aid in determining the scope of the claimed subject matter.